Canada Gazette, Part I, Volume 160, Number 25: Rules Amending the Refugee Protection Division Rules

June 20, 2026

Statutory authority
Immigration and Refugee Protection Act

Sponsoring agency
Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada

REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT

(This statement is not part of the Rules.)

Executive summary

Issues: The Strengthening Canada’s Immigration System and Borders Act (the Amending Act) introduced changes to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act designed to improve the efficiency and integrity of the In-Canada Asylum System. The Refugee Protection Division Rules (the RPD Rules) set out clear and transparent procedural requirements for parties and their counsel appearing before the Refugee Protection Division (RPD), for decision-makers (members) who decide cases, and for the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada employees who support the decision-making process. If the RPD Rules are not updated when the new legislative framework comes into force, the IRB would not be able to effectively implement and operationalize the amendments introduced by the Amending Act, which would undermine the effective functioning of the asylum system.

Description: The proposed Rules Amending the RPD Rules (the proposed Amendments) would align the rules with legislative changes to the asylum system. The proposed Amendments would amend rules regarding the submission of basis of claim information to support the new single online application process, new abandonment of claims before referral, the time limit for the disclosure of information and documents and the method of communication with the RPD.

Rationale: The proposed Amendments are expected to have limited cost impacts on the Government of Canada and claimants and primarily align procedural requirements with legislative changes introduced by the Amending Act. Any costs are expected to be offset by the benefits. The proposed Amendments are expected to benefit the Government of Canada and claimants by providing clear and transparent procedural requirements, improving case management, reducing postponements, and supporting more timely and efficient proceedings.

Issues

On October 8, 2025, the Government of Canada introduced the Strengthening Canada’s Immigration System and Borders Act (the Amending Act), which introduced amendments to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) intended to improve processing efficiency and integrity within the asylum system. To support the effective implementation of this new legislative framework, the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) must amend its Refugee Protection Division Rules (the RPD Rules) to align procedural requirements with the amended IRPA. Without corresponding updates to the RPD Rules, the IRB would not be able to effectively implement and operationalize the new asylum system, and participants in Refugee Protection Division (RPD) proceedings would lack clarity on the applicable procedural requirements.

More concretely, among other changes, the Amending Act introduces the framework for a single online application, expands the role of the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (the Minister) in receiving documents and information for the purpose of making a refugee claim and considering claims prior to referral to the RPD, and introduces a mechanism authorizing the RPD to determine whether a claim should be declared abandoned where claimants failed to comply with information or examination requirements prior to referral. These measures aim to ensure that, to the extent possible, complete claims are referred to the IRB only after the Minister has had an opportunity to carry out the necessary due diligence activities. Minister’s due diligence refers to activities undertaken by the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) and Immigration, Refugee, and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) to identify issues related to integrity, credibility, misrepresentation, criminality and other grounds of inadmissibility. This due diligence also includes assessing whether the Minister should intervene in RPD proceedings through a notice of intervention.

The current RPD Rules governing the disclosure of information and documents are not aligned with the objectives of the Amending Act to improve the efficiency and integrity of the asylum system. In particular, the existing disclosure time limits require documents to be provided too close to the hearing date. For example, under the new legislative framework, claimants would be required to submit a complete application, including the basis of claim information, to the Minister before their claim is referred to the RPD. Claimants would continue to be able to submit additional documents in support of their claim after referral to the RPD. However, under the current Rules, the applicable time limit (10 days before a hearing) for submitting documents limits the RPD’s ability to triage files into case management streams in a timely manner, limits preparation time for members and parties, and frequently contributes to the postponement of hearings, which can contribute to unnecessary delays and stress for claimants.

In addition, the RPD Rules governing the exchange and delivery of documents between RPD and the participants are outdated and have not kept pace with technological developments. The RPD Rules continue to allow inefficient and outdated methods of communication that no longer reflect current operational realities or modern technologies and do not support effective case management and timely case processing.

Amendments to the RPD Rules are needed to align them with the Amending Act and to improve the efficiency of the asylum system.

Background

The IRB is Canada’s largest independent administrative tribunal and is mandated to make well-reasoned refugee decisions efficiently, fairly, and in accordance with the law. Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA), the IRB Chairperson, subject to approval by the Governor in Council, and in consultation with the Deputy Chairpersons, has the authority to establish and revise procedural Rules for all divisions of the IRB. These Rules define the practices and requirements for parties, including time limits for applications, document disclosure, communication protocols, and formatting standards. The Rules are essential for ensuring that cases are handled fairly, efficiently, and lawfully.

Refugee Protection Division

The RPD is responsible for determining whether a claimant qualifies as a Convention refugee or a person in need of protection under sections 96 and 97 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA). The RPD also hears applications from the Minister to cease or vacate a person’s protected status. The RPD schedules a hearing for most refugee claims, while some claims may be accepted without a hearing pursuant to its authority under paragraph 170(f) of the IRPA.

Most proceedings before the RPD are non-adversarial in nature, meaning that they are inquisitorial and not contested by the Minister through an intervention. The Minister, whose authorities in refugee matters are exercised by the CBSA and IRCC, has the right to be represented in all matters before the RPD.

In assessing refugee protection claims, RPD members have access to country condition information produced by the IRB commonly referred to as National Documentation Packages (NDPs). The IRB produces NDPs for every country from which refugee claims originate. NDPs compile objective and reliable information on country conditions, drawing on sources such as international human rights organizations and government reports, and are disclosed by the RPD in every refugee claim so parties have access to this information. These packages support the refugee determination process, but they are not intended to be conclusive as to the merit of any particular claim for refugee protection.

The IRB’s operating environment

Timely and fair adjudication is central to the IRB’s mandate and essential to the effective functioning of Canada’s asylum system.

The IRB has implemented a suite of initiatives to improve efficiency, including implementing the My Case Portal, which enables the RPD to exchange information and documents with claimants, counsel and designated representatives. The IRB has introduced initiatives to conclude more straightforward claims efficiently, including processes in which some claims can be decided via expedited procedures.

In recent years, the IRB has applied a multi-pronged strategy to reduce the number of postponed hearings, made better use of expedited procedures, including establishing the Expedited Cases Team, formerly the Task Force on Less Complex Claims, to expedite protection decisions for eligible asylum claimants, and began implementing digital processing of claims (moving away from paper files) to improve file management and interoperability between the IRB, the CBSA and IRCC. These initiatives have strengthened the efficiency and timeliness of refugee determination by helping to reduce delays, accelerate decisions, improve information-sharing with partner agencies, and by beginning to modernize processes through streamlined case management.

Despite these initiatives and an increase in productivity, intake continued to outpace funded capacity and the IRB continues to face heavy caseload pressures. In the 12 months ending in March 2026, the RPD received 99 500 new asylum claims, bringing its inventory to 298 200 cases, with average wait times reaching 25 months. In fiscal year 2025–26, the RPD finalized 82 644 cases while being funded to complete 70 000 claims. In this context, amendments to the Rules are necessary to implement the Amending Act and enable operational efficiencies that cannot be achieved through administrative measures alone.

The Amending Act

The following summarizes elements of the Amending Act that require amendments to the RPD Rules.

Single online application process and referrals by the Minister
Abandonment of claims before referral
Physical presence in Canada and other amendments introduced by the Amending Act
Disclosure of information and documents
Method of communication with the RPD

Amendments to the rules are needed to address these issues and improve the efficiency, sustainability and management of Canada’s asylum system.

Objective

The objective of the proposed Rules Amending the Refugee Protection Rules (the proposed Amendments) is to support the efficient administration of the asylum determination system by aligning the RPD Rules with the legislative changes introduced by the Amending Act. In addition, consistent with the objective of the Amending Act, the proposed Amendments are intended to improve the efficiency and timeliness of proceedings by enabling the RPD to obtain a complete case file earlier in the adjudicative process. This would support more effective triage and scheduling of cases, reduce postponements of hearings and facilitate more timely and effective case processing and decision-making, while maintaining procedural fairness.

The proposed Amendments are also intended to support the IRB’s transition to a more fully digital tribunal by eliminating outdated methods of communication, which would improve administrative efficiency, and reduce administrative burden and processing delays.

Description

The proposed Amendments would apply to

The key elements of the proposed Amendments are described below.

Amendments to support the new single online application process for refugee claims and referrals by the Minister

Application stage
Referral stage
After referral stage

Abandonment of claims before referral introduced by the Amending Act

The proposed Amendments would specify procedures to support the abandonment of claims before referral to the RPD, as introduced by the Amending Act. The proposed Amendments would create a new distinct Rule to

Other amendments to align with changes introduced by the Amending Act

Amendments to support efficiency and digital processes

Regulatory development

Consultation

The IRB launched a written consultation of its RPD and RAD Rules on June 25, 2025. Respondents were provided until August 6, 2025, to provide their comments and recommendations. Those taking part in the written consultation included the IRCC, the CBSA, and the following stakeholders who compose the IRB Consultative Committee (IRB CC):

Respondents were invited to provide written comments on seven areas of focus for potential changes to the RPD and RAD Rules. The IRB received 11 submissions from IRB CC stakeholders, and also received one submission each from the CBSA and IRCC. This section discusses only those areas that are included in, and relevant to, the proposed Amendments. Feedback received on other areas of focus is outside the scope of the proposed Amendments but may inform the development of potential subsequent changes to the Rules.

Method of communication with the RPD as part of enabling a digital tribunal

Comments: Stakeholders broadly supported the move away from fax as an outdated and inefficient method of communication. However, some stakeholders expressed concerns about eliminating fax and other alternative communication methods without sufficient safeguards, noting access and reliability challenges for self-represented and detained claimants and during technical outages. They emphasized the importance of maintaining flexibility and clearly defined alternative methods of communication to ensure accessibility and procedural fairness.

There was broad agreement that the Minister should be required to use My Case for serving documents, with several stakeholders raising concerns regarding the continued reliance on fax and mail by the Minister, arguing that it undermines digital transformation and places an unfair burden on claimants and counsel.

Response: The proposed Amendments would remove fax as a method of communication with the RPD, which is an important step toward a more digital tribunal. This proposed change is anticipated to have a positive impact on claimants. The IRB takes the principles of natural justice and procedural fairness seriously and implements any new procedures or direction in a manner that strikes the appropriate balance between efficiency and fairness so that claimants have a proper opportunity to present their case. As such, access to the My Case Portal for claimants will continue to be introduced gradually. This phased approach is meant to gather feedback on how to make onboarding and services accessible for claimants, including for those who are self-represented. Other methods of communication such as mail will remain available for claimants who do not have access to the My Case Portal. In addition, once the My Case Portal is fully implemented, the IRB will retain the flexibility to allow alternative communication methods in exceptional circumstances.

The IRB is still in the early stages of assessing how to onboard the Minister and Minister’s counsel to My Case to further improve efficiency in the submission of documents. Access to My Case is not available to them at this time.

Filing of evidence

Comments: Stakeholders’ feedback on evidence filing highlighted a tension between efficiency and fairness. While some stakeholders supported earlier disclosure to enable expedited processing, many emphasized that early disclosure is unrealistic, given long wait times. Stakeholders noted that certain categories of evidence are often obtained and submitted closer to hearing dates because they are not available earlier. This includes “fresh” evidence relating to claimant profiles, such as sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, and sex characteristics identity, and religious affiliation and activities. For example, a refugee claimant may have little documentary evidence of their sexual orientation from their home country because it was not safe for them to be open about their identity. In such cases, relevant supporting evidence may emerge closer to the hearing date rather than at the outset of the claim.

Stakeholders emphasized that claimants face significant personal and logistical challenges to early evidence collection. During their early months in Canada, claimants are often focused on supporting their settlement needs; therefore, the collection of documentation such as mental health assessments and evidence from abroad, which are frequently dependent on family and friends, may only become available closer to the hearing date.

Legal aid organizations noted limited funding restricts translation services and reinforces the need for flexibility in deadlines for vulnerable claimants. CARL and CCR noted that early disclosure can result in outdated evidence by the hearing date and risk disadvantaging those who face barriers in gathering and translating documents. Across stakeholder groups, there was support for flexible admissibility rules to allow late evidence where necessary. Most disclosures are typically submitted shortly before the hearing to maximize efficiency, minimize costs and avoid duplicating work.

Response: The proposed Amendments require claimants to provide any personal documents they wish to rely on at the hearing no later than 30 days after their claim was referred to the RPD. This requirement would apply to claims referred to the RPD on or after the day the proposed Amendments come into force. Separate and existing time limits for the disclosure of country condition documents would continue to apply (i.e. 10 days before a hearing).

The RPD is an independent, quasi-judicial administrative tribunal that decides refugee claims fairly, efficiently and in accordance with the law. It follows principles of natural justice and fairness that require claimants to be treated fairly and given a proper opportunity to present their case. When documents are important and relevant in deciding a claim, the RPD will accept them when doing so is necessary to ensure a fair determination of the claim.

An application process already exists for submitting documents late, recognizing that in exceptional cases, documents may only become available later, or claimants may have a valid reason for missing the deadline. This proposed change would not create additional costs or burdens for claimants and is expected to benefit them, as described in the cost and benefit analysis section.

Consultations were undertaken with portfolio departments, CBSA and IRCC, which are responsible for administering the asylum system and implementing the Amending Act, to assess operational impacts, implementation requirements, and resource considerations associated with the proposed Amendments.

Indigenous engagement, consultation and modern treaty obligations

The proposed Amendments are not expected to impact Indigenous peoples. An assessment of modern treaty implications has been conducted, pursuant to the Cabinet Directive on the Federal Approach to Modern Treaty Implementation. No adverse impacts on potential or established Indigenous or treaty rights, which are recognized and affirmed in section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, were identified.

Instrument choice

Under subsection 161(1) of the IRPA, the Chairperson of the IRB, subject to the approval of the Governor in Council, may make rules respecting the activities, practices, and procedures of each Division of the IRB.

Consideration was given to establishing instructions governing the practices and procedures of the RPD through other instruments, such as practice notices alone. However, such instruments would not provide a sufficiently authoritative framework to reflect the changes introduced by the Amending Act. In addition, reliance solely on other instruments would have resulted in rules that no longer align with the IRPA and that do not clearly set out the RPD’s authorities and core procedural requirements.

It was therefore determined that setting out the proposed changes in the Rules, the most authoritative instrument at the IRB’s disposal, would establish clear, binding, and transparent foundational procedural requirements for both the Board and persons appearing before it. The RPD would continue to complement its Rules with other instruments, where appropriate.

Regulatory analysis

Benefits and costs

The analysis uses current RPD Rules, guidance (e.g. Chairperson’s Guidelines, Practice Notices), case law, and changes introduced under the Amending Act as the baseline to determine any costs that would occur if the proposed Amendments were implemented. The proposed Amendments primarily introduce changes to procedural requirements to align with changes introduced in IRPA by the Amending Act. The proposed Amendments do not change the legal test for the purpose of determining if a claim meets the definition of refugee convention or person in need of protection, and they do not alter the jurisdiction of the RPD in considering the merits of claims.

Overall, the proposed amendments would contribute to a more efficient, trusted and responsibly managed asylum system that would better serve both claimants and the Canadian public. Public confidence in Canada’s asylum system would be strengthened by enabling earlier screening of claimants who may experience vulnerabilities, facilitating the earlier identification of potential security or fraud risks, and supporting faster and more efficient processing of files. Given that the Government of Canada funds provincial and territorial legal aid programs, these amendments would further help to strengthen stewardship of public funds.

Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada
Costs

The proposed Amendments are expected to have a limited impact on IRB operations.

Although there will be ongoing costs incurred by the IRB, they will be incurred as a result of the Amending Act and not the proposed Rules. The IRB is expected to incur one-time costs associated with implementation activities directly arising from changes introduced by the proposed Amendments, including training, updating forms and guidance, and potential minor modifications to NOVA, its core case management system.footnote 1

The proposed Amendments related to the new abandonment proceeding that applies before a claim is referred to the RPD are not expected to result in incremental costs for the IRB. Any additional activities or efforts associated with this proceeding are set out in the Amending Act. The proposed Amendments would support the implementation of this statutory process by setting out clear procedural expectations for both claimants and the Minister (whose authorities are exercised by delegated officials within the CBSA and IRCC), to support the proper and transparent administration of this proceeding.

The RPD already conducts abandonment proceedings under existing Rules and IRPA that occur once a claim has been referred, where applicable. While the proposed Amendments would introduce a Rule addressing abandonments that occur prior to referral, this represents a slight procedural adjustment for the RPD when compared to the current Rules and procedures applicable to post-referral abonnement. Any increase in the number of abandonment proceedings would result from the Amending Act, rather than from the proposed Amendments themselves.

The proposed Amendments require that claimants submit personal documents they wish to use at a hearing earlier than the existing Rules. The existing RPD Rules provide a mechanism for claimants and the Minister to seek permission to submit late documents so processing costs on a per request basis would not change; however, if the earlier submission deadline leads to increased requests to submit documents following the deadline, it could result in additional costs for the RPD. However, these costs are expected to be offset by the benefits described below.

Benefits

The proposed change requiring claimants to submit personal documents earlier would result in efficiency gains arising from improved case management, more effective triage of claims, including identifying cases that may be suitable for resolution through established expedited procedures, a reduction in the volume of late documents submitted close to hearings, and fewer postponements. It would also allow hearings to be scheduled more efficiently, provide more preparation time for parties and members, and reduce follow-up actions and delays associated with incomplete files.

In cases where the Minister has not intervened and is not initially a party to the claim, there remains a possibility of later intervention based on information and documents submitted by claimants to the RPD after the claim is referred to the RPD. The RPD must notify the Minister of any exclusion, eligibility or certain inadmissibility issues that may apply to a claim, and the RPD may notify the Minister of any integrity issues where this would assist in the full and proper hearing of the claim. When documents are submitted late in the process and close to the hearing, this can result in postponements to allow for possible intervention by the Minister. Earlier submission of personal documents from claimants allows the RPD to identify potential issues and assess sooner if it needs to notify the Minister, improving case management and reducing the risk of potential postponements.

In addition, earlier submission of documents is beneficial to the Government of Canada, as it may assist in detecting potential integrity issues sooner, such as fraudulent claims, which is essential in maintaining public confidence in Canada’s refugee protection system.

CBSA and IRCC
Costs

IRCC and CBSA are already required to adjust their processes and implement the changes introduced to the asylum system by the Amending Act. The proposed Amendments primarily align procedural requirements with the new legislative framework established by the Amending Act and do not introduce new obligations for the CBSA and IRCC beyond those that already exist in the RPD Rules, in IRPA, and those arising from the Amending Act. The proposed Amendments are expected to only result in minimal implementation costs such as updating operational guidance and procedures.

The proposed amendments related to abandonment before a claim is referred to the RPD would not result in ongoing costs for CBSA or IRCC. Any incremental costs associated with these changes can be attributed to the Amending Act.

Finally, the proposed changes requiring the Minister to submit supporting documents at the same time as a notice of intervention would not add any costs to the CBSA and IRCC. This change does not introduce new activities or obligations for CBSA and IRCC, which intervenes in a small proportion of cases. Under the new legislative framework, the CBSA and IRCC will have more information from claimants earlier in the process and will complete due diligence activities and identify in most cases if they intervene before they refer a claim to the RPD. As such, the need to file late documents and the need to revisit claims later in the process would likely not increase when compared to the current system, where the Minister often receives documents and information later after a claim has been referred to the Board.

Benefits

The proposed Amendments would support the processes applied by CBSA and IRCC under the Amending Act by establishing clear and predictable procedural requirements for both the Minister and claimants.

Earlier access to claimants’ documents would help reduce hearing postponements that can occur when documents are provided to the Minister too close to the hearing date. This would give the Minister more time to review the documents and prepare for the hearing where the Minister is a party, or to assess whether to intervene, as applicable.

Where the CBSA or IRCC files supporting documents along with a notice of intervention, claimants are better positioned to understand and respond to the issues raised at an early stage. This may facilitate earlier resolution of issues and reduce the need for in-person participation by the Minister in some cases.

Removing fax as a method of communication from the Rules would not result in costs for the CBSA and IRCC, as they infrequently use this mode to share documents with the RPD. Eliminating fax is an important step for information to flow directly into digital workflows and supports the IRB and Government of Canada’s broader digital transformation. For clarity, this proposed change is not intended to limit parties’ ability to communicate with one another by fax.

Claimants
Costs

The proposed Amendments are administrative and procedural in nature and primarily adjust procedural requirements with the new legislative framework. Therefore, the proposed Amendments are not expected to generate additional financial or operational burden on claimants beyond what is required under the Amending Act and existing Rules.

The proposed Amendments do not change the legal tests or evidence threshold applied in assessing the merits of refugee claims. In addition, as noted in the background section, when making a claim, claimants will be required under the Amending Act to submit their complete application to the Minister, including their basis of claim information. If they wish to do so, claimants can include any documents supporting their claim at the time of the application.

The proposed Amendments requiring claimants, once their claim has been referred to the RPD, to submit personal documents earlier in the process, may, in limited circumstances, result in the potential need to submit late personal documents. However, any potential costs are expected to be minimal and are anticipated to be offset by the benefits described below. It should be noted that disclosure requirements for country condition documentation remain unchanged, and existing procedures already allow for the late submission of documents where necessary.

Removing fax as a method of communication is expected to have minimal impact on claimants. Any potential impacts would be mitigated by the availability of other communication methods set out in the Rules.

Benefits

Earlier submission of documents and information would support more effective case management by allowing claims to be triaged and directed sooner to the most appropriate process, which could result in expedited proceedings or shorter hearings for claimants. Earlier submission of documents also allows the Minister to assess potential interventions at an earlier stage. It helps claimants identify the issues to be decided in their case and better prepare for their hearing, allowing them to preserve their scheduled hearing dates and improve access to the refugee determination system. Postponements of hearings can lead to unnecessary stress and delays for claimants.

When the RPD has access to a more complete file containing relevant documents supporting a claim early in the process, through its triage functions, it can identify key issues to be decided in a claim sooner. The RPD can better identify and signal to claimants earlier in the process what documents or information may be required or missing, which may eliminate the need for claimants to provide detailed medical information and other information later in the process that may not be necessary. In some cases, this can result in a shorter process, where claimants may not need to retain counsel and make the process more accessible for claimants.

Overall, more effective triage, reduced late filing of documents, and fewer postponements would benefit claimants by supporting shorter and more predicable case processing and decision timelines, and reducing the personal and practical burdens on claimants associated with prolonged refugee claim processes.

The proposed changes requiring the Minister to submit supporting documents at the same time as a notice of intervention would benefit claimants by improving procedural fairness and help them prepare early before their hearing.

Small business lens

Analysis under the small business lens concluded that the proposed Amendments will not impact Canadian small businesses. The rules apply to individuals; thus, any requirements fall outside the definition of “administrative burden on business” in the Policy on Limiting Regulatory Burden on Business. Any requirements that would be carried out by lawyers or immigration consultants are considered to be on behalf of individuals, and as such, are not considered to be direct impacts on business.

One-for-one rule

The one-for-one rule does not apply, as there is no impact on business. The rules apply to individuals; thus, any requirements fall outside the definition of “administrative burden on business” in the Red Tape Reduction Act. 

Regulatory cooperation and alignment

The proposed Amendments are not related to a work plan or commitment under a formal regulatory cooperation forum.

International obligations

The proposed Amendments are not related to any international obligations.

Effects on the environment

In accordance with the Cabinet Directive on Strategic Environmental and Economic Assessment, a preliminary scan concluded that a strategic environmental assessment is not required.

Gender-based analysis plus

The legal tests and criteria that guide decision-makers in evaluating each case’s merits are detailed in the IRPA, IRPR and case law. The IRB has a fundamental obligation to ensure all parties have a full opportunity to present evidence and make arguments for their case; the proposed Amendments do not change this.

As identified under the Consultation section of this document, stakeholders raised concerns about potential barriers to earlier submission of documents. In particular, they noted that earlier time limits could be challenging for some claimants, including recipients of legal aid; persons whose sexual orientation, gender identities, and gender expressions must be taken into account; claimants who may be experiencing mental health challenges; and those whose personal circumstances may change over time. The intent of earlier disclosure of information and documents is to enable the IRB to strengthen its case management approach, including identifying claims that may be suitable for expedited processing. In addition, the RPD already has an application process in place for submitting late disclosure. This allows parties to request that the division accept documents filed after the deadline as evidence for the proceeding. Through this application, parties have an opportunity to explain why the document is important for the hearing and what it contributes to the case.

The late disclosure application process provides mitigation measures for claimants who may face challenges in obtaining evidence earlier, ensuring that fairness is preserved while maintaining efficiency in case management. It is recognized that a standard procedure may not always fit the circumstances of every person, so the Rules will continue to give the RPD power to modify procedures to ensure that parties receive a fair hearing. In addition, the IRB has existing instruments and a targeted Gender Related Task Force (GRTF) to support a gender-inclusive perspective. The proposed Amendments would be supported by these guidelines, which provide guidance on procedural accommodations for persons with vulnerabilities, including children, women, and individuals whose sexual orientation or gender identity and expression, and sex characteristics must be taken into account. The proposed Amendment would also support the RPD in better planning hearings that are responsive to the accessibility needs of claimants.

The data below provide an overview of individuals appearing before the RPD, based on available information such as age and gender.

RPD finalized cases by gender and age group (2020-21 to 2024-25)

Total: 259 917 cases

By gender: 57% (148 800) male, 43% (110 838) female, and 72 finalized cases in the other category (nonbinary/other identities).

Age group composition

The Gender Related Task Force (GRTF) is a dedicated team of decision-makers that hears and decides gender-related refugee claims. While all members can hear gender-related claims, GRTF members receive additional specialized training focusing on trauma-informed adjudication and decision making, questioning from a cross-cultural and trauma-informed perspective, cultural humility, intersectionality and reflexivity, and consistent adjudication of these claims. Claims assigned to the GRTF are determined based on evidence, the specific merits of the claim, and in accordance with the law.

Gender Related Task Force (GRTF) [2020-21 to 2024-25]

Implementation, compliance and enforcement, and service standards

Implementation

The proposed Amendments would come into force on the day upon which subsection 43(5) of the Amending Act comes into force, but if they are registered after that, they would come into force on the day on which they are registered. They will apply to all refugee claims, except those covered in the transitional provisions.

The IRB will continue to measure, monitor, and publicly report on RPD performance through its annual report to Parliament, consistent with its accountability framework.

The RPD anticipates improved timeliness in case resolution and continued delivery of high-quality decisions. These outcomes will be assessed using performance indicators established in the IRB’s 2025–2026 Departmental Plan (PDF) and reported in the 2024–25 Departmental Results Report, which are tabled in Parliament on an annual basis. For the RPD, these indicators include:

To support implementation, the IRB would provide training to decision-makers, Registry staff, and other affected personnel on the updated procedures. To ensure alignment with the proposed Amendments, the IRB would update operational instruments, including the Chairperson’s Guidelines, to ensure consistency with the proposed Amendments.

Contact

Evan Travers
Senior General Counsel
Legal Services
Minto Place — Canada Building
344 Slater Street, 14th Floor
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0K1
Email: IRB.Policy-Politiques.CISR@irb-cisr.gc.ca

PROPOSED REGULATORY TEXT

Notice is given that the Chairperson of the Immigration and Refugee Board, subject to the approval of the Governor in Council, in consultation with the Deputy Chairpersons, proposes to make the annexed Rules Amending the Refugee Protection Division Rules under subsection 161(1)footnote a of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Actfootnote b.

Interested persons may make representations concerning the proposed Rules within 30 days after the date of publication of this notice. They are strongly encouraged to use the online commenting feature that is available on the Canada Gazette website but if they use email, mail or any other means, the representations should cite the Canada Gazette, Part I, and the date of publication of this notice, and be sent to Evan Travers, Senior General Counsel, Legal Services, Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, Canada Building (Minto Place), 344 Slater Street, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0K1 (email: IRB.Policy-Politiques.CISR@irb-cisr.gc.ca).

Ottawa, June 12, 2026

Janna Rinaldi
Assistant Clerk of the Privy Council

Rules Amending the Refugee Protection Division Rules

Amendments

1 (1) The definitions Basis of Claim Form, officer and vulnerable person in rule 1 of the Refugee Protection Division Rulesfootnote 2 are repealed.

(2) Paragraph (a) of the definition contact information in rule 1 of the Rules is replaced by the following:

(3) Rule 1 of the Rules is amended by adding the following in alphabetical order:

basis of claim information
means the information referred to in Schedule 1 that a refugee claimant must provide under paragraph 6(1)(a). (renseignements sur le fondement de la demande d’asile)

2 Rules 3 and 4 of the Rules are replaced by the following:

Providing documents and information in writing

3 (1) If the Minister refers a claim for refugee protection to the Division under subsection 100.1(1) of the Act, the Minister must, without delay,

Providing copies to claimant

(2) The Minister must provide to the claimant a copy of any documents or information that the Minister has provided to the Division under paragraph (1)(b).

Change to contact information

4 (1) If the claimant’s contact information changes after the claim is referred to the Division under subsection 100.1(1) of the Act, or transmitted to the Division under subsection 102.1(1) of the Act, the claimant must without delay provide the changes in writing to the Division and to the Minister.

Information concerning claimant’s counsel

(2) If the claimant retains or changes counsel — or if their counsel’s contact information changes — after a claim has been referred to the Division under subsection 100.1(1) of the Act, or transmitted to the Division under subsection 102.1(1) of the Act, the claimant must without delay provide the following information, in writing, to the Division and to the Minister:

3 The heading before rule 6 and rules 6 to 9 of the Rules are replaced by the following:

Basis of Claim Information and Documents

Documents and information to be provided

6 (1) For the purposes of subsection 100(4) of the Act, the claimant must provide the following documents and information to the Minister:

For greater certainty

(2) For greater certainty, every claimant who is 18 years of age or older must provide the applicable declarations referred to in paragraphs (1)(d) to (f) whether or not their claim is made together with other claimants.

Changes or additions to information

7 (1) To make changes or additions to the basis of claim information after a claim has been referred to the Division under subsection 100.1(1) of the Act, the claimant must provide to the Division the changes or additions, in writing, together with

Time limit

(2) The information referred to in subrule (1) must be provided without delay but must be received no later than five days after the day on which the claimant receives a notice to appear referred to in rule 25.

Identity and travel documents

(3) A claimant who obtains an identity or travel document after the claim has been referred to the Division under subsection 100.1(1) of the Act must provide a copy of it to the Division and the original to the Minister, without delay, and must include with the copy sent to the Division a statement indicating how and when the original was provided to the Minister.

Language of documents and information

8 (1) Subject to subrule (2), the documents and information referred to in rules 6 and 7 must be in English or French.

Exception — identity and travel documents

(2) The documents referred to in paragraphs 6(1)(b) and (c) and subrule 7(3) may be provided in a language other than English or French if they are provided with an English or French translation and a declaration signed by the translator that meets the requirements set out in subrule 32(3).

4 Subrule 10(5) of the Rules is replaced by the following:

Variation of order of questioning

(5) The Division must not vary the order of questioning unless there are exceptional circumstances.

5 Rule 23 of the Rules and the heading before it are repealed.

6 Subrules 25(1) and (2) of the Rules are replaced by the following:

Notice to appear

25 (1) The Division must notify the claimant or protected person and the Minister, in writing, of the date, time and location of the proceeding and, if applicable, of any information required to attend the proceeding by a means of live telecommunication.

7 Paragraph 27(3)(b) of the Rules is replaced by the following:

8 Subrule 33(2) of the Rules is replaced by the following:

Disclosure of country condition documents by Division

(2) The Division may disclose country condition documents by providing to the parties a list of those documents or providing information as to where a list of those documents can be found on the Board’s website.

9 (1) Paragraphs 34(3)(a) and (b) of the Rules are replaced by the following:

(2) Rule 34 of the Rules is amended by adding the following after subrule (3):

Non-application

(4) Subrule (3) does not apply in respect of documents provided for the purposes of a special hearing on abandonment under rules 65 and 65.1.

10 Rule 39 of the Rules is amended by adding “and” after paragraph (c) and by repealing paragraph (d).

11 Subrule 42(2) of the Rules is replaced by the following:

Documents referred to in paragraph 3(1)(b)

(2) On the written request of the Division, the Minister must without delay provide to the Division the original of any document referred to in paragraph 3(1)(b) that is in the Minister’s possession.

12 Paragraph 43(3)(c) of the Rules is replaced by the following:

13 Subrule 53(4) of the Rules is amended by adding “and” after paragraph (e) and by repealing paragraph (f).

14 (1) Subrule 54(1) of the Rules is replaced by the following:

Application in writing

54 (1) An application to change the date or time of a proceeding must be made in accordance with rule 50, but the party is not required to give evidence in an affidavit or statutory declaration.

(2) Subrule 54(4) of the Rules is replaced by the following:

Exceptional circumstances

(4) The Division must not allow the application unless there are exceptional circumstances, such as an emergency or other development outside the party’s control and the party has acted diligently.

(3) Subrules 54(5) and (6) of the Rules are replaced by the following:

Application for medical reasons

(6) If a claimant or protected person makes the application for medical reasons, other than those related to their counsel, the claimant or protected person must provide to the Division, together with the application, a legible, recently dated medical certificate signed by a qualified medical practitioner whose name and address are printed or stamped on the certificate.

(4) Subrule 54(11) of the Rules is repealed.

15 Rule 65 of the Rules is replaced by the following:

Opportunity to make representations

65 (1) Before determining whether a claim has been abandoned under paragraph 104.1(1)(a) of the Act or subsection 168(1) of the Act, the Division must provide the claimant with the opportunity to make representations.

Representations

(2) The Division must notify the claimant in writing whether the representations are to be made in writing or at a special hearing on abandonment, and the time limits by which any written representations or other documents must be provided to the Division.

Factors to consider

(3) The Division must, in determining whether the claim has been abandoned, consider the representations made by the claimant and any other relevant factors, including the fact that the claimant is ready to start or continue the proceedings.

Late document

(4) If the claimant does not provide a document to the Division within the time limit referred to in subrule (2), the Division is not required to consider that document.

Failure to provide representations

(5) The claimant is considered to be in default of the proceedings if they fail to provide written representations within the time limit referred to in subrule (2) or if they fail to attend the special hearing on abandonment, unless the Division allows an application to change the date or time of the hearing or changes the time limit for the claimant to provide written representations.

Medical reasons

(6) If the claimant’s representations include medical reasons, other than those related to their counsel, the claimant must provide to the Division a legible, recently dated medical certificate signed by a qualified medical practitioner whose name and address are printed or stamped on the certificate.

Content of certificate

(7) The medical certificate must set out

Failure to provide medical certificate

(8) If the claimant fails to provide the medical certificate or if the medical certificate does not meet the requirements of subrules (6) and (7), the claimant must provide

Start or continue proceedings

(9) If the Division determines that the claim has not been abandoned, it must start or continue the proceedings on the day on which the decision is made or as soon as practicable after that day.

Transmission by Minister — subsection 102.1(1) of Act

65.1 (1) When the Minister transmits a claim to the Division under subsection 102.1(1) of the Act, the Minister must at the same time provide to the Division and to the claimant any relevant documents and information, including those that indicate

Additional information — Minister

(2) If, after the documents and information have been provided under subrule (1), the Minister receives additional relevant documents or information, the Minister must provide them to the Division and to the claimant without delay.

Representations

(3) For the purposes of subsection 102.1(2) of the Act, the Division must notify the claimant in writing whether representations are to be made in writing or at a special hearing on abandonment, and the time limits by which any written representations or other documents must be provided to the Division.

Factors to consider

(4) The Division must, in determining whether the claim has been abandoned, consider the representations made by the claimant and any other relevant factors, including the fact that the claimant is ready to comply with the requirements referred to in subsection 102.1(4) of the Act.

Late document

(5) If the claimant does not provide a document to the Division within the time limit referred to in subrule (3), the Division is not required to consider that document.

Failure to provide representations

(6) The claimant is considered to be in default of the proceedings if they fail to provide written representations within the time limit referred to in subrule (3) or if they fail to attend the special hearing on abandonment, unless the Division allows an application to change the date or time of the hearing or changes the time limit for the claimant to provide written representations.

Medical reasons

(7) If the claimant’s representations include medical reasons, other than those related to their counsel, the claimant must provide to the Division a legible, recently dated medical certificate signed by a qualified medical practitioner whose name and address are printed or stamped on the certificate.

Content of certificate

(8) The medical certificate must set out

Failure to provide medical certificate

(9) If the claimant fails to provide the medical certificate or if the medical certificate does not meet the requirements of subrules (7) and (8), the claimant must provide

Notifications by Minister

(10) The Minister must notify the Division without delay if

New determination

(11) If the Minister notifies the Division under subparagraph (10)(a)(ii), the Minister must provide, at the same time, the documents and information referred to in subrule (1) to the Division and to the claimant.

16 Schedule 1 to the Rules is amended by replacing the reference after the heading "SCHEDULE 1" with the following:

(Rule 1 and paragraph 6(1)(c))

17 Item 1 of Schedule 1 to the Rules is replaced by the following:
Item Information
1 Claimant’s name and any other names that the claimant uses or has used in the past.
18 Item 3 of Schedule 1 to the Rules is replaced by the following:
Item Information
3 Claimant’s sex and gender.
19 Items 7 and 8 of Schedule 1 to the Rules are replaced by the following:
Item Information
7 Whether the claimant is afraid to return to their home country, or the country where they normally live, because they believe that they would be at risk of persecution or experience harm, mistreatment or threats if they were to return to that country today. If so, a description of what the claimant expects would happen, including a description of who would persecute, harm, mistreat or threaten them, and what the claimant believes would be the reasons for it.
8 Whether the claimant, a relative of the claimant or other people in the claimant’s situation were persecuted or faced other harm, mistreatment or threats by any person or group. If so, a description of who persecuted, harmed or mistreated or threatened them and the reasons for it.
20 Schedule 1 to the Rules is amended by adding the following after item 12:
Item Information
12.1 Date the claimant entered Canada.
21 Item 14 of Schedule 1 to the Rules is replaced by the following:
Item Information
14 If a child under seven years old is claiming refugee protection with the claimant, an explanation of why the claimant believes the child would be at risk of persecution or other harm, mistreatment or threats if the child were to return to their home country or the country where they normally live.
22 Item 16 of Schedule 1 to the Rules is replaced by the following:
Item Information
16 Every country in which the claimant believes they are at risk of persecution or other harm, mistreatment or threats.
23 Item 17 of Schedule 1 to the English version of the Rules is replaced by the following:
Item Information
17 Every country in which the claimant is or has been a citizen, including how and when citizenship was acquired and present status.
24 Items 18 and 19 of Schedule 1 to the Rules are replaced by the following:
Item Information
18 Name, date of birth, citizenship and place and country of residence of relatives, living or dead, specifically the claimant’s spouse, common-law partner, children, parents, brothers, sisters and grandparents.
19 If the claimant or the claimant’s relative, specifically their spouse, common-law partner, child, parent, brother, sister or grandparent, has claimed refugee protection or asylum in Canada or in any other country or territory — including at a Canadian office abroad or from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees — the details of the claim including the name of the person who made the claim, and the date, location and result of the claim, and, if any, the Immigration and Refugee Board file number or Department of Citizenship and Immigration client ID number.
25 Schedule 1 to the Rules is amended by adding the following after item 20:
Item Information
20.1 Whether someone assisted the claimant in obtaining a Canadian visa and, if so, the name of the person, their relationship to the claimant, their position title and whether the person was paid.
26 Item 22 of Schedule 1 to the Rules is replaced by the following:
Item Information
21.1 Whether the claimant received assistance in making their refugee claim and, if so, the name of the person, their relationship to the claimant and their position title.
22 Whether the claimant is represented by counsel and, if so, the counsel’s contact information, their relationship to the claimant, details on what the counsel has been retained to do and any limitations on the counsel’s retainer.

27 Schedule 2 to the Rules is repealed.

28 Item 3 of Schedule 3 to the Rules is replaced by the following:
Item Information
2.1 Claimant’s or protected person’s relationship to their counsel.
3 Name of counsel’s firm or organization, if applicable, and counsel’s contact information.
29 Items 5 and 6 of Schedule 3 to the Rules are replaced by the following:
Item Information
5 Declaration signed by the claimant or protected person that the counsel who is representing or advising them is not receiving consideration, that the counsel is not a person referred to in any of paragraphs 91(2)(a) to (c) of the Act and that the information provided under items 1 to 3 is complete, true and correct.
6 Declaration signed by counsel that they are not receiving consideration for representing or advising the claimant or protected person, that they are not a person referred to in any of paragraphs 91(2)(a) to (c) of the Act, and that the information provided under items 1 to 3 is complete, true and correct.

Transitional Provisions

Definitions

30 (1) The following definitions apply in this section.

former Rules
means the Refugee Protection Division Rules as they read immediately before the day on which these Rules come into force. (régles antérieures)
new Rules
means the Refugee Protection Division Rules as they read on the day on which these Rules come into force. (nouvelles règles)

Time limit in paragraph 34(3)(a) of former Rules — claimant

(2) Paragraph 34(3)(a) of the former Rules continues to apply in respect of a document that is to be provided by a claimant under subrule 34(3) of the new Rules if their claim for refugee protection was referred to the Division before the day on which these Rules come into force.

Time limit in paragraph 34(3)(a) of former Rules — Minister

(3) Paragraph 34(3)(a) of the former Rules continues to apply in respect of a document that is to be provided by the Minister in respect of a refugee claim under subrule 34(3) of the new Rules if the notice referred to in rule 29 of the Refugee Protection Division Rules was provided to the claimant or to the Division before the day on which these Rules come into force.

Time limit in paragraph 34(3)(a) of former Rules — abandonment

(4) Paragraph 34(3)(a) of the former Rules continues to apply in respect of a document that is to be provided in respect of a special hearing referred to in rule 65 of the Refugee Protection Division Rules if the date of the hearing was fixed before the day on which these Rules come into force.

Coming into Force

31 These Rules come into force on the day on which subsection 43(5) of the Strengthening Canada’s Immigration System and Borders Act, chapter 4 of the Statutes of Canada, 2026, comes into force, but if they are registered after that day, they come into force on the day on which they are registered.

Terms of use and Privacy notice

Terms of use

It is your responsibility to ensure that the comments you provide do not:

  • contain personal information
  • contain protected or classified information of the Government of Canada
  • express or incite discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, sexual orientation or against any other group protected under the Canadian Human Rights Act or the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
  • contain hateful, defamatory, or obscene language
  • contain threatening, violent, intimidating or harassing language
  • contain language contrary to any federal, provincial or territorial laws of Canada
  • constitute impersonation, advertising or spam
  • encourage or incite any criminal activity
  • contain external links
  • contain a language other than English or French
  • otherwise violate this notice

The federal institution managing the proposed regulatory change retains the right to review and remove personal information, hate speech, or other information deemed inappropriate for public posting as listed above.

Confidential Business Information should only be posted in the specific Confidential Business Information text box. In general, Confidential Business Information includes information that (i) is not publicly available, (ii) is treated in a confidential manner by the person to whose business the information relates, and (iii) has actual or potential economic value to the person or their competitors because it is not publicly available and whose disclosure would result in financial loss to the person or a material gain to their competitors. Comments that you provide in the Confidential Business Information section that satisfy this description will not be made publicly available. The federal institution managing the proposed regulatory change retains the right to post the comment publicly if it is not deemed to be Confidential Business Information.

Your comments will be posted on the Canada Gazette website for public review. However, you have the right to submit your comments anonymously. If you choose to remain anonymous, your comments will be made public and attributed to an anonymous individual. No other information about you will be made publicly available.

Comments will remain posted on the Canada Gazette website for at least 10 years.

Please note that communication by email is not secure, if the attachment you wish to send contains sensitive information, please contact the departmental email to discuss ways in which you can transmit sensitive information.

Privacy notice

The information you provide is collected under the authority of the Financial Administration Act, the Department of Public Works and Government Services Act, the Canada–United States–Mexico Agreement Implementation Act,and applicable regulators’ enabling statutes for the purpose of collecting comments related to the proposed regulatory changes. Your comments and documents are collected for the purpose of increasing transparency in the regulatory process and making Government more accessible to Canadians.

Personal information submitted is collected, used, disclosed, retained, and protected from unauthorized persons and/or agencies pursuant to the provisions of the Privacy Act and the Privacy Regulations. Individual names that are submitted will not be posted online but will be kept for contact if needed. The names of organizations that submit comments will be posted online.

Submitted information, including personal information, will be accessible to Public Services and Procurement Canada, who is responsible for the Canada Gazette webpage, and the federal institution managing the proposed regulatory change.

You have the right of access to and correction of your personal information. To seek access or correction of your personal information, contact the Access to Information and Privacy (ATIP) Office of the federal institution managing the proposed regulatory change.

You have the right to file a complaint to the Privacy Commission of Canada regarding any federal institution’s handling of your personal information.

The personal information provided is included in Personal Information Bank PSU 938 Outreach Activities. Individuals requesting access to their personal information under the Privacy Act should submit their request to the appropriate regulator with sufficient information for that federal institution to retrieve their personal information. For individuals who choose to submit comments anonymously, requests for their information may not be reasonably retrievable by the government institution.